linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] [DISCUSS] Make the variable NULL after freeing it.

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 1 Jan 2007 22:42:41 +0100 (MET)
From:	Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@...ux01.gwdg.de>
To:	Ingo Oeser <ioe-lkml@...eria.de>
cc:	Andreas Schwab <schwab@...e.de>,
	Amit Choudhary <amit2030@...oo.com>,
	Bernd Petrovitsch <bernd@...mix.at>,
	Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>,
	Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] [DISCUSS] Make the variable NULL after freeing it.


On Jan 1 2007 22:40, Ingo Oeser wrote:
>On Monday, 1. January 2007 17:25, Andreas Schwab wrote:
>> Ingo Oeser <ioe-lkml@...eria.de> writes:
>> > Then this works, because the side effect (+20) is evaluated only once. 
>> 
>> It's not a side effect, it's a non-lvalue, and you can't take the address
>> of a non-lvalue.
>
>Just verified this. So If we cannot make it work in all cases, it will
>cause more problems then it will solve.
>
>So we are left with a function, which will 
>a) only be used by janitors to provide "kfree(x); x = NULL;" 
>    with an macro KFREE(x) in all the simple cases.

Just checking, where has it been decided that we actually are going to have
kfree_nullify() or whatever the end result happens to be called?


Thanks,
	-`J'
-- 
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/